Bill discusses some Libertarian principles and ideas with Justin Barclay (15 minutes)
This interview was recorded on November 27, 2017 with Justin Barclay on WOOD-Radio in Grand Rapids. Bill has appeared on Justin’s show previously when Chairman of the LPM in August of 2016. He predicted the eventual major party status achieved as a result of Gary Johnson’s showing in the general election.
This casual interview covered a number of subjects — from general libertarian principles and the problems with big government programs — to Bill’s specific plan to cut the Headlee Cap (see Michigan Constitution, Article IX, Section 26) from the current 9.49% of personal income to 8.55% — a 10% reduction.
More positions and information coming each week. Keep your eye on the news.
We need to legalize marijuana.
Period. I can almost hear the “there go the Libertarians again” in the media. Those remarks ignore the enormous cost the drug war has heaped upon our country. The personal cost borne by young people and very unevenly on people of color is well documented. People get a negative mark that scars them for life. It’s time to end it now.
Upon election, I will immediately appoint a board to recommend clemency for ANY offender who did not commit another crime in conjunction with their marijuana arrest.
Legalization in Colorado, Washington, and elsewhere means the interest groups and the media can’t lie to you any more about the impacts of legalization. Many of the problems claimed by the prohibitionists simply did not materialize.
We’re finally breaking the cartels in Mexico and elsewhere, as legalized marijuana is driving them out of the trade.
And this ties into the use of resources. We don’t need more courts, probation officers, police, prosecutors, prisons, guards, and the rest of the enforcement apparatus needed continue this assault on our liberty. Instead, criminal justice should be focused on crimes against people and property.
I favor a broad exemption from any form of taxation on marijuana distributed as medicine. Patients enduring pain from chronic disease, injury, PTSD, or other medical affliction should not have enormous new taxes imposed on their care.
As for new revenues. I support diverting no more than 20% of any income derived from legalization (and it should not be taxed any more than any other item) — and that 80% of these revenues go directly back to taxpayers in the form of an equalized tax credit.
Libertarian challenges Republicans in opening policy speech
November 15, 2017, Allegan, Michigan –
With the race for Governor a full year away, Bill Gelineau, candidate for the Libertarian Party nomination, ignited a crowd of supporters and others in an open forum Tuesday night with a detailed outline for reshaping Michigan’s budget.
Early in his speech, Mr. Gelineau outlined his plan to unite forces from all corners of the liberty movement. “If you liked Gary Johnson’s solutions oriented approach – then I think you’ll like what I have to say.” He went on to cite that as a small businessman and family man, he decried outrageous and radical changes that make the burdens imposed by government unpredictable. “Massive changes in tax rates and huge changes in service structures are not what Michigan needs.” Rather, he suggested a “persistent and active effort” to reduce spending.
The heart of the Gelineau Plan is his “10 by 10” a reduction in the current Headlee Amendment State Spending Cap. After first explaining his personal connection to tax-limitation hero Dick Headlee, he challenged leading Republican candidates to step to the plate and endorse a plan to reduce the Constitutional cap on State spending.
Current State spending is now hovering just above 8% of personal income – limited by law to 9.49%. Not since 1999 has the State exceeded the cap, which automatically triggers a rebate to all taxpayers.
“This is a responsible first step”, added Libertarian State Chairman Bill Hall. “A more realistic cap will force the legislature to focus on core priorities instead of pet projects and the ‘bringing home the bacon’ mentality which prevails in Lansing.”
By contrast, Governor Snyder’s $56.5 billion budget represents <u>an increase of 19.7% in just 6 years</u>.
One of the key areas of the Gelineau Plan involves elimination of the Michigan Strategic Fund. While allowing for reassignment of some activities, he outlined a basic criticism which echoes a prime theme in his campaign. “Government should not be subsidizing businesses. Period.” He explained that current difficulties in maintaining critical infrastructure are made worse when huge inducements are given to well-connected big businesses – while simultaneously, small businesses and homeowners must carry an ever-increasing share of the tax burden.
In addition to discussing tax and budget policy, Gelineau endorsed both marijuana legalization efforts. This is a huge opportunity to shift law enforcement priorities away from a prohibition culture to the protection of the public from malicious intent and fraud. From law enforcement to courts to prisons, the prohibition of marijuana is “a budget wrecker”.
The history of mental health throughout the world is rife with attempts to “help” and “do good work”. I accept as a premise that Libertarian social engineering is not any better than that of Democrats or Republicans who have had good intentions. It is my commitment to provide a comprehensive statement of the plans that I would work to implement with the legislature.
Our team is still in the process of developing a comprehensive statement. But, unlike many of the others in this race, we don’t want to rush for the sheer purpose of having something for people to read. Most of the plan is being announced on May 9, 2018 at the National Alliance on Mental Illness – Michigan Chapter – State Conference in Traverse City. Unlike most others in the race, I intend to use the experience to learn more about the public policy aspects of mental illness — and listen to concerns.
I take as a given that we live in a world of limited resources. So, any plans must live within the Michigan budget constraints I’ve outlined in my “Drop the Cap” proposal.
That having been said – much of the discretionary budget in Michigan is wasted on unproductive items. The top of that list is the Michigan Strategic Fund – much of which provides support to profitable business operations which should not receive government assistance. I’ve outlined my support for legalization of marijuana and a specific commitment to reduce our prison population by 30%. As such, I will outline specific proposals to assist the Michigan Department of Public Health develop innovative programs.
Mental health itself carries a very controversial purpose within the larger liberty movement. It is not our goal to define and monitor normal. Instead, the role of public policy should be to ensure our citizens have access to REAL programs which help them realize their own dreams. Too often, mental health assistance has been stigmatized and isolated from being integrated with the other important socialization systems — education and work.
Our proposal, when announced (tentatively on June 22), will provide a clear new direction for people struggling in Michigan. And, like everything else, we tell you exactly how we’re going to pay for it. Stay tuned!
April 10, 2018 – Special Note: There has been considerable debate on Facebook regarding this position. It is my contention that the LAW, as currently written, prevents the President from using the National Guard in actions that do not have the requisite Declaration from Congress either of War OR a National Emergency.
It is important to say that this is not a discussion about whether giving that power to the President is a good idea – or the merits of using The Guard in overseas or domestic actions. The law was changed in 2007 to give President Bush wide authority to use the National Guard. All 50 Governors objected as a usurpation of power. In 2008, the law was reversed to restore the prior condition.
Below my statement, I’ve outlined the relevant section of the US Code governing the use of reserve components, the NDAA of 2007 relevant sections, and the NDAA of 2008 sections which cite repeal and restore Section 12301 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code.
If elected Governor, I’ll stop the misuse of our National Guard.
I will use every available means to prevent the President of the United States from federalizing our National Guard Troops for use in a foreign conflict that has not had a Declaration of War by the United States Congress.
Over many generations, my family has had many members serve in various branches of the military. My father served in the U.S. Navy….. grandfathers (both) in the U.S. Army. I have a niece serving now.
I believe that often we’ve been too quick to war. But, even if the conditions were such that the use of military forces could be considered appropriate — a Governor of this State should do all in their power to ensure that our National Guard protected from misuse by the President. Our Constitution relies on the Congress to pass a Declaration before the President can use National Guard Troops — whose primary mission is internal — and acts at the prerogative of the Governor.
While some believe this is radical, most would understand that the Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the States. Only under a proper Declaration of War would the President then request the cooperation of the State to bring the National Guard into Ready Reserve. The last several decades have witnessed a misuse of Presidential Authority by both Democratic and Republican Presidents. We must ensure that the blood of our men and women is not sent afield without forethought and commitment. Our representatives in Washington owe us that.
Here are the sections of Title 10, the NDAA of 2007, and the NDAA of 2008
10 U.S. Code § 12301 – Reserve components generally
(a) In time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress, or when otherwise authorized by law, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may, without the consent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for the duration of the war or emergency and for six months thereafter. However a member on an inactive status list or in a retired status may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection unless the Secretary concerned, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense in the case of the Secretary of a military department, determines that there are not enough qualified Reserves in an active status or in the inactive National Guard in the required category who are readily available.
(d) At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may order a member of a reserve component under his jurisdiction to active duty, or retain him on active duty, with the consent of that member. However, a member of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection without the consent of the governor or other appropriate authority of the State concerned.
National Defense Authorization Act of 2007.
[For Fiscal 2007… passed October 17, 2006]
SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.
(a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED
(1) IN GENERAL
.—Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
‘‘§ 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law
‘(a) USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES
(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to—
‘‘(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that— (continues)
[Over the objections of ALL 50 State Governors, this law was passed which allows the President, for the first time, to unilaterally order the armed forces, including the National Guard into a wide range of activities.]
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 – HR 4986 PL 110-181 Eff. 1-28-2008
(Sec. 1068) Revises federal provisions concerning the use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies to discontinue the executive authority to deploy active and reserve personnel during domestic response incidents. Repeals the authority of the President to direct the Secretary to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons affected by major public emergencies.
Repeal of provisions in section 1076 of Public Law 109–364 relating to use of Armed Forces in major public emergencies (sec. 1068) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 1054) that would repeal section 1076 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364) and revive the provisions of sections 333 and 12304(c) of title 10, United States Code, as they were in effect prior to the effective date of that Act, and repeal section 2567 of title 10. The Senate amendment contained a similar provision (sec. 1022).
The Senate recedes.
SEC. 1068. REPEAL OF PROVISIONS IN SECTION 1076 OF PUBLIC LAW 109-364
RELATING TO USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.
(a) Interference With State and Federal Laws.– [details not shown]
(b) Repeal of Section Relating to Provision of Supplies, Services, and Equipment.–
(c) Conforming Amendment.–Section 12304(c) of such title is amended by striking “Except to perform” and all that follows through “this section” and inserting “No unit or member of a reserve component may be ordered to active duty under this section to perform any of the functions authorized by chapter 15 or section 12406 of this title or, except as provided in subsection (b),”.
(d) Effective Date.–The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.